The Man of Steel returns...

We're drawing ever closer to the return of The Man of Steel to return to our screens.  In the aptly named 'Man of Steel', being brought to us by Zack Snyder a year from now in June 2013.

Zack has been responsible for 300 and Sucker Punch, both of which have their own unique visual styling.  It remains to be seen how much this influences the stylings of The Man of Steel, but I for one think it will only be a good thing when breathing new life back into the Superman franchise.  We've already seen what may be considered a modern day re-imagining of Superman, thanks to Bryan Singer's Superman Returns in 2006.  So Zack will definitely need to bring something new to the table with his Man of Steel.  One sure fire way of doing this will be through his casting, which so far looks to be spot on for a more edgy and less clean cut vision of The Man of Steel.

For starters you have Henry Cavill as The Man of Steel himself:

For those not familiar with Henry, he has been most recently (and most notably in my opinion) on our screens as Theseus in Immortals.  If you haven't seen Immortals, I would recommend it.  I can understand how Cavill would have gotten onto Snyder's radar as a result.  Heavily inspired by 300, Immortals is visually more vibrant but with less teeth, and much less shouting.  In short, it's everything that Wrath of the Titans wishes it could have been, and in it Henry Cavill does a great job of being a humble chap who doesn't want any trouble with a dash of ultimate bad ass thrown in.  With the added bonus being that he can actually act!

Then we have Amy Adams (brilliant in The Fighter) as love interest and leading lady, Lois Lane.  A stella parentage in the form of Kevin Costner and Diane Lane, as John and Martha Kent.  Then to add some the rough and ready edge you have Russell Crowe weighing in as Jor-el Father of The Man of Steel himself.

To add to this, we have General Zod making a return as the villain.  An excellent character first portrayed by Terrence Stamp.  I hope in the Man of Steel he remains as pompous and arrogant under the guise of Michael Shannon.  Even better if he is still flanked by Non, although I have seen no mention of him as yet in any cast list.  And whilst this would be a welcome stroll down memory lane, modern day audiences don't seem to take to well to that type of monosyllabic, dim witted character type anymore.

Needless to say, the combination of Zack Snyder's unique visual style, and a quality cast list.  I'm really looking forward to seeing the results come June 2013.

The saviour of DC?

As we draw closer to the release of The Dark Knight Rises, speculation increases as to where Christopher Nolan will go after this.

There has been lots to say that whilst he will not be at the helm of any further Batman films, he will help produce future Batman reboots.  The current trend for reboots is something that I'm finding myself increasingly at odds with.  Take the recent 'reboot' of The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo.  

I'm a big fan of the 2011 film, the book, and of David Fincher.  The problem being it's critical reception due to it's proximity to the original, had a damaging effect on it's box office performance.  This in turn has put a dampener on the subsequent sequels, in particular the turning off of Fincher.  Who has pretty much categorically ruled out a return to the chair for the remainder of the films.  The current news being that both sequels are due to be filmed back to back (starting in the autumn), for release in 2013.  I'm not holding my breath.

Back to Nolan.

I'm reading lots about plans for Nolan to be the saviour of the remainder of DC Comics character stable.  Most notably with a reboot of The Green Lantern (hence my earlier comment about reboots).  I'm not hugely opposed to a Green Lantern reboot, as the Ryan Reynolds outing was particularly awful, and as a character The Green Lantern deserves better.

What concerns me more is the possibility of Nolan getting caught in a black hole of comic book adaptations (which wouldn't be the end of the world, as I love comic book movies), ultimately detracting from other projects.  Nolan has the midas touch, and I love the variety and quality of his films.

One door that this does potentially open though, and one that is currently a hot topic out there, is the Justice League being brought to the big screen.

This I would love to see...

I am the LAW!

The reboot of Judge Dredd is not far away now.  A great character that I am looking forward to seeing (I won't say again, but we'll come to that in a moment), especially as Karl Urban is stepping into the lead role.  I'm confident he will make a great job of giving Judge Dredd the big screen outing he deserves.

As you may, or may not, know, Dredd had a previous outing courtesy of Sylvester Stallone.

Before we go any further, let's not forget that Dredd originally came to us via the Great British comic anthology 2000 AD.  He's a law enforcement officer in a violent city who has the power to take on the role of judge, jury and executioner.  Dealing out a lethal brand of justice as he sees fit.  For someone who has no super powers, this guys is the ultimate bad ass!  This guy has even taken on Aliens, yes the very same acid for blood ones we know and love from the famous film franchise.

Imagine my horror when watching the 1995 outing.  The bloody things a show tune or two away from being a sodding musical!  Don't even get me started on the Angel Gang, Mean Machine Angel...well, it's just not right I tell you.

Luckily by the end of the year, things will be set right.  Judge Dredd will be The Law once more.

Prometheus vs. Alien

One of my 'ones to watch' for 2012, I really got hyped about Prometheus on the run up to it's release.  I've now seen the film, and spent the last few days reading what everyone else has to say about it.

If you haven't seen it yet...you might not want to read on.  There will be spoilers.

One of my favourite reviews so far has come from @infamouskidd's article on Aintitcool.com, here's the link if you want to check it out:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/56298

Some reviews have been quite scathing, soap boxes have been dusted off and claws sharpened.  Others go too far the other way, rose tinted glasses and blinkers must have been handed out on the way into the cinema.

The reason I like Billy's is because it's, in my opinion, remaining objective on what appears to be turning into a bit of a marmite topic.

On a side note, this is clearly the most hilarious review of Prometheus ever:

http://badassdigest.com/2012/06/08/sam-strange-remembers-prometheus/

Whilst Ridley Scott had to reference the links to the Alien story pre release, for contextual reasons as well as to heighten anticipation, it's the constant connections and comparisons I was trying to make that took away from the overall film.  The most important thing for me with relation to the Alien films were that I found out about 'the spaceship' and 'the guy in the chair'.  Beyond that, Prometheus has to be viewed as a film of it's own.

I found the film to be visually stunning.  Also creative and ambitious in it's story telling.  I could have ambled along towards the ending that we were all expecting.  Instead it aimed for some real flourishes, which in my opinion it pulled off.  The idea of our creation by a race who then go to great lengths to destroy us is very thought provoking.  Also the 'black ooze' which manifests itself in various different ways throughout the film I found very interesting.  Whilst it's been heavily criticised, the fact is that the Aliens from the franchise we know and love are birthed from the ooze, and you could argue that the acidic xenomorphs are the stuff of nightmares, so I find this variable manifestation quite poetic.

I also particularly like Fassbender's David.  I genuinely felt that sense of being morally unburdened, his curiosity is childlike and untethered by thoughts of consequences and ramifications.

The one thing that lets the film down for me is the character development, or lack of.  Again a feature of many people's criticisms, though one I believe to be justified.  The two best characters are Meredith Vickers and David.  Charlize Theron manages to execute Meredith's slide from cool and in control, to out of control and panicked perfectly.  Whereas early in the film, we feel sorry for David when he is mocked for trying to mimic his human counterparts.  Before a great scene at the end with Noomi Rapace, where David claims to feel fear and I adopted the same mocking nature that earlier had made me feel sorry for him.  The biggest disappointment in terms of character development is Idris Elba's Captain Janek.  I'm a great fan of Idris (for anyone who isn't familiar with his work, go and watch Luther), so I was very excited to see him included in the cast line up.  He has some great moments, and a very heroic sign off, 'HANDS UP!'.  The only problem is that he has the kind of insight that someone only gets from experience or a bloody past, but we never even get a whiff of what those experiences may have been.

Overall Prometheus is a hugely enjoyable film that I will be watching again.  The best thing about it, everyone will come away with something different.  I could sit and pick over elements of the film and the story for hours, but you just have to see it for yourself.  I just wish I could go back in time to advise myself to forget about the Aliens franchise before going to see it the first time, and to just sit back and enjoy the ride.

Do I jump on the bandwagon?...

I want to start by making a confession.  I'm a fan of the Twilight franchise, and by this point I have yet to read any of the books.  My only experience is the films.  This is the complete opposite to the norm for me.  I went to great lengths to make sure I'd read the Harry Potter books before I saw the corresponding films  The books always have more to offer in my opinion.  Everyone can take away something unique for themselves.  Their imagination makes it that way.

So the question is, do I want to go down the same road with The Hunger Games?

Until the release of the film, I knew nothing about the series.  The same can be said until I recently went to see the first instalment of the franchise.  Since then I've done a little homework into the series of books behind the film(s).  Suzanne Collins has achieved great success in tapping into the lucrative market of adolescent/late teen/young adults, with excesses of time and money.  You have all the big hitting themes in there, poverty, famine, social uprising, politics, even love found and love lost.  Although I've reached that age where I see all of these things happening outside my door, in the world.  I suppose I need to read the books themselves to really pass judgement, but what's making me wonder if I have time to devote to them, is the film.  Here's why...

We start with the main premise of the film, The Hunger Games themselves. Boys and girls aged between 12 and 18 fighting to the death.  Immediately you start to draw comparisons with Battle Royale (itself a film adapted from a novel, involving children fighting each other to the death).  Although it was less restricted by it's target audience (Battle Royale was certificated 18, and banned for a long period of time following it's release), with Battle Royale you felt the stark terror and sheer confusion of the children's situation.  This was a bunch of school children that had been taken against there will and forced to fight to the death!  The Hunger Games, well that whole concept just felt soft around the edges.  The one time you felt the terror, panic, and hopelessness of Katniss' situation was when she entered the tube just before the start of the games.  This was helped in part by the great sound editing, making you feel as though you were in there with her as the doors slid shut and all exterior sounds we muted out.  Beyond that, I just wasn't made to feel the injustice of the situation they were faced with.

This same numbness was, to me, present throughout the other elements of the film too.  Don't get me wrong, I got the themes that the film is trying to broach.  The poverty of the districts in comparison to the money and advances of the Capitol.  The 'big brother' government.  Even the love story thrown in for good measure.  If we take the love story element in direct comparison with the other great teen franchise, Twilight, there you have the edgy backdrop of vampires and werewolves.  Great catalysts for romance, lust and love.  And whilst The Hunger Games comes at it from the 'we need to ham it up for the sake of our survival, but am I really falling in love with you?' angle, again, I'm just not feeling it.  It's all thinking and reasoning.  I'm not feeling it.  As it is with the other themes mentioned above.

Part of the problem for me, is my final gripe, the incoherent back story to flesh the whole thing out.  Now I must admit that as a sci-fi fan, a loose back story is something that I should be accustomed to.  In a lot of cases I let a great wealth of things slide in this department.  Sometimes though, it just niggles me.  Gets under my skin, and I have to start picking at the holes.  This was one of those such occasions.

What happened during the uprising?  Did the districts exist before this point, or were they created afterwards?  What circumstances lead to people living in the Capitol, or is it purely a birthright?  The lack of answers to these questions, for me, meant that all the other ideas and concepts struggled to gain traction.

That brings me back to my original question.  Do I go down the same road with The Hunger Games as I have with Twilight.  Continuing to watch the films without reading the books?  Or would reading the books make me more forgiving of my perceive shortcomings within the films?

Make time for Cabin in the Woods...

It's been a while since I went to see Cabin in the Woods, so it's about time I share my thoughts on it with you.

I mentioned in an earlier post that my first experience of Cabin in the Woods was during an article on BBC's website.  The article spoke about too much information being given about the plot of a film during it's trailers.  Here's a link to the article http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16972394

In the article it makes reference to viewers witnessing a force field barrier.  A bird flies into it, apparently giving away vital plot details.  I will agree only that it gives away the fact that a force field barrier features during the film.

The films opens with a sequence during which 2 men are walking through some kind of complex having a conversation about an upcoming project they're about to start work on.  It's very reminiscent of 80's america, workmen with their lunch boxes, the only thing that's missing are the hard hats.  What this sequence does is throw the cat among the pigeons from the word go.  You immediately know that something isn't right.

From there it continues along more familiar, formulaic lines.  To the point where after about 20 minutes I was sitting in fear that I was about to witness another teen slasher horror.  Then I realise that something very special is happening.  The witty Whedon dialogue, the familiar faces (for Whedon fans you'll notice faces from Doll House, Buffy and Angel), and the sublimely layered and drip fed storyline.  All of a sudden I'm in nerd/scifi/film lovers heaven.

The story is expertly brought together as well as being amazingly imaginative.  I know I've previously made reference to the gut-stabbing unicorn, but to go from innocent midterm holiday in the woods, to devil worshipping, human sacrificing, multi national corporation is something to behold.  With some sexy wolf kissing thrown in for good measure (it's just not right I tell you!)

Put in it's simplest terms.  Cabin in the Woods is a brilliant film for the casual viewer, and a tour de force for lovers of the genre.

Joss puts it very well in his own words during an interview with Total Film:

"On another level it's a serious critique of what we love and what we don't about horror movies. I love being scared. I love that mixture of thrill, of horror, that objectification/identification thing of wanting definitely for the people to be alright but at the same time hoping they’ll go somewhere dark and face something awful. The things that I don't like are kids acting like idiots, the devolution of the horror movie into torture porn and into a long series of sadistic comeuppances. Drew and I both felt that the pendulum had swung a little too far in that direction"

I loved the spectacle of The Avengers, and as a huge Marvel fan, this is by default my top film of 2012 (this is my Oscar winner).  Cabin in the Woods, this takes my Palme d'Or.

Pre Spoiler Alert!!

It has been brought to my attention that in my last post I didn't give any warning before talking about a plot detail from Super 8.  Granted it was a minor plot detail, and one that is glaringly obvious and in no way a twist.  Yet still, a plot detail none the less...without warning.

So I would like to take this opportunity to provide a pre spoiler alert.

Especially if you are a close friend of mine.  One who has an exceptionally good DVD collection that is completely without filler (seriously, not one in the whole lot that I wouldn't gladly watch).  Who also seems to take on average 5 months to see a film once it has been released, almost 12 in the case of Super 8.  It was released in August 2011 for crying out loud!

Yes Matt, this is for you.

My next blog post will go into detail about Cabin in the Woods.  I've held off for as long as possible, but it's just too good a film to not talk about.

Go and watch it now.

Just for the record (and to avoid any notion of exaggeration), it has been 291 days since the release of Super 8 on August 5th 2011.  It has then been 39 days since the release of Cabin in the Woods on 13th April 2012.  When citing Matt's tendency to procrastinate in seeing films, I used these as the examples which gave me the average of 165 days, or 5.42 months.  I rounded it down to 5.  Although in fairness I then hammed it up by saying it was almost 12 months since Super 8's release.